The actual ASA PBS LOA is out.

[OCP]

VERY important point-the company can screw us any way they want!

-VOTE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They can do that to you now. Or did you not know that?

 

[Jack-O-Lantern]

I hope no one expects this single LOA to solve the entire reserve issue

That's exactly right. I think some people think this is contract negotiations! It is what it is.Simply put, it's negotiations for a PBS system that will will be at ASA, and in my opinion, looks industry leading!

 

[aircombat]

Guys. We are one of the last regionals without PBS. We need it to be competitive. If we can get an industry-leading PBS system in the process of becoming more competitive, that is great.

I strongly urge that if competitiveness/growth is a major reason that you want to vote yes, you should reconsider. I know that most other regionals have it however, we are not playing on the same field as them anymore. We are now an alter ego airline and for any chance of growth will have to become cheaper than our sister company. If you or the union want to continue waving the growth flag there is going to have to be some data to back it up. I want to know how much money this can save the company, what are ASA’s total expenses, and what are Skywest’s total expenses? Without that data you are just wandering blindly. Is saving the company less than 1% going to make us cheaper than Skywest? Also remember what happened to the other regionals that voted in LOAs for growth.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

I strongly urge that if competitiveness/growth is a major reason that you want to vote yes, you should reconsider. I know that most other regionals have it however, we are not playing on the same field as them anymore. We are now an alter ego airline and for any chance of growth will have to become cheaper than our sister company. If you or the union want to continue waving the growth flag there is going to have to be some data to back it up. I want to know how much money this can save the company, what are ASA’s total expenses, and what are Skywest’s total expenses? Without that data you are just wandering blindly. Is saving the company less than 1% going to make us cheaper than Skywest? Also remember what happened to the other regionals that voted in LOAs for growth.

First of all, you need to study up on what an alter-ego airline is. We were purchased in our present form, not started as a union-busting maneuver.

Second, exactly how will voting no (and thumbing your nose to management) help your position? Your attitude is the same as those that burn as much fuel as possible when they are angry that the company will not give them a pay raise. It makes absolutely no sense, and shows ignorance.

SkyWest wants us to be successful and profitable. PBS will help us towards that, and make us look more appealing. Voting no out of spite, that's just stupid.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Oh, and I'm voting yes because I think it will be better for the pilots, as well as the company as a whole. PBS is a more advanced method of bidding, and will be better than line bidding just due to that fact alone, not to mention all of the other advantages negotiated into the LOA. Why would I want someone else to build my schedule?

 

[aircombat]

I hope no one expects this single LOA to solve the entire reserve issue

That's exactly right. I think some people think this is contract negotiations! It is what it is.Simply put, it's negotiations for a PBS system that will will be at ASA, and in my opinion, looks industry leading!

Jack you never offer any constructive input. This is your chance. What exactly makes it industry leading? Most of the positive points in this LOA have nothing to do with PBS. Is it the false sense of control this PWG offers? The ability to not get total hosed on vacation? Our current system is still better.
You do bring up a good point. Why isn’t this a new contract? They have essentially changed every section. Is it common for companies to change most of the contract with an LOA? I know that LOAs are common however they are usually making only slight changes. This way we don’t even get a meager bonus check.

 

[aircombat]

Oh, and I'm voting yes because I think it will be better for the pilots, as well as the company as a whole. PBS is a more advanced method of bidding, and will be better than line bidding just due to that fact alone, not to mention all of the other advantages negotiated into the LOA. Why would I want someone else to build my schedule?

I will agree with you if you mean “better for the top 10% of the pilots”. Many people realize that the desirability decreases exponentially with less seniority. I think it comical that there is a provision making it so that reserve pilots will not have to work 5 or 6 days in a row, if there are extra reserves available, however line pilots can be assigned 5 or 6 days in a row.
Some people say well they don’t do that now so why would they do it with PBS. Simply because they will have to. Now efficient pairings are matched in lines with less efficient pairings. Otherwise pilots would complain about the sharp contrast between line QOL. With PBS the very senior pilots will pick-up all of the high block pairings leaving only low block pairings. To meet the minimum block credit, pairings will have to be back to back or with only 2 days off in-between them. Were will the cut off point be between good and bad lines? I have no clue. A lot will depend how the pairings are made and not even the PWG has any control over that.

 

[Poppa Hodax]

I hope no one expects this single LOA to solve the entire reserve issue

The Company and the Union missed an opportunity then. Fixing (or at least improving) the reserve system would have helped in a lot of ways. Not only would the quality of life for Reserves been improved, but that improvement could have rallied a lot of support behind the PBS vote. Line holders can't reasonably expect Reserves (who have no hope of holding a line any time soon) to support an agreement that offers them little. The Union and the Company had a chance to show the entire pilot group some improvement. Instead, they more or less gave the Reserves the finger.
Further, improving the QOL of Reserves now would help over the looming grind of contract negotiations. The Union shouldn't be overly surprised when the Reserves aren't particularly excited to rally round the flag during negotiations. And May isn't that far off.

 

[aircombat]

First of all, you need to study up on what an alter-ego airline is. We were purchased in our present form, not started as a union-busting maneuver.

Second, exactly how will voting no (and thumbing your nose to management) help your position? Your attitude is the same as those that burn as much fuel as possible when they are angry that the company will not give them a pay raise. It makes absolutely no sense, and shows ignorance.

SkyWest wants us to be successful and profitable. PBS will help us towards that, and make us look more appealing. Voting no out of spite, that's just stupid.

I’m not trying to “thumb my nose at management”, or doing anything out of spite. Is what I am trying to do is set obtainable goals and do what is necessary to reach them. Saving the company less than 1% simply isn’t going to obtain a goal of growth. When it comes to growth, since it will be impossible to become cheaper than Skywest, there is only ONE solution. The union doesn’t like that solution because there is a slight risk to their existence. I don’t think there is a large chance that we would lose the union however the alternative to this story is worse.

 

[gator_hater]

who are you blowing in scheduling?" I know of several pilots including myself that have had RR assignments turn in to as many as 5 day trips... and this has occurred on repeated occasions. Many more times than not, you will be out 2,3, or 4 days on a RR. THAT IS WHAT NEEEDS TO BE STOPPED....IN WRITING NOT A HANDSHAKE AGREEMENT.

To answer your question noone, guess I just got lucky. I also did't have near the RR assignments most did because (I think) I rarely moved off days around. Don't get me wrong, the provision about 4 days away is a great thing. It could be stronger, but this is a start.

 

[USCtrojan]

Oh, and I'm voting yes because I think it will be better for the pilots, as well as the company as a whole. PBS is a more advanced method of bidding, and will be better than line bidding just due to that fact alone, not to mention all of the other advantages negotiated into the LOA. Why would I want someone else to build my schedule?

Count me as a yes as well. I like the language and we can iron it out in section 6 when we get there.

Trojan

 

[aircombat]

Senior FOs will not like that some of the better pairings will not be available for them to bid on. Pairings that line check pilots bid on will not be available for FOs to bid (13.U.4.2). They will either be used for training or put into open time!

 

[EV120]

For the near term, there is no training taking place. If training starts, senior FO's will be the ones getting trained through upgrades.

I withhold my vote until I see it all and have it explained.

 

[gator_hater]

PBS is a more advanced method of bidding, and will be better than line bidding just due to that fact alone... Why would I want someone else to build my schedule?

I had to bid for FEB around a single day. With PBS I could simply adjust my "normal" preferences to shift my flying that week and not get forced into eliminating half of our line choices. Among other benefits sounds like a winner... but I'll reserve final judgement for after a road show.

 

[sinkrate]

I'm not an ASA pilot but I do have a lot of experience with different PBS systems, their use and application. PBS is not new. It has been around since the 80's. It is definitely a double edged sword. When negotiated and used to your benefit it can be very beneficial for you. The pilot groups that have the most experience with PBS are America West, Hawaiian and NW. They love it - now. But those same pilot groups have been hopelessly screwed with it too. Like most pilot groups when implementing PBS you guys on this forum are focusing on the wrong things. That will lead you to bad decisions and contract language. PBS changes almost every single aspect of how pilots are scheduled. There is no comparison with bid lines. You need to data dump everything you think you know about line construction and start with a clean sheet of paper.

Some things to consider
-Management can take two different approaches to using PBS. The first is a misguided attempt to improve 'utilization'. That can only be done with the marketing schedule and trip construction. If they attempt to use PBS for this they are using it to reduce line holders days off. This was tried by America West in the late 90's, NW in the summer of '06 and a number of other properties. It results in a lot of cancellations and a miserable pilot group with every one scheduled at or near the min days off. The contract language that facilitates this revolves around vacation and training credit and line minimum and maximum values. In NW's case they received no credit for vacation or training and their lines were still constructed to the maximum credit.
-After management screws this up they either keep banging your head against the wall trying to make it work or they learn to use PBS as a cost management tool - the second approach. When used as a cost management tool they simply want every pilot to earn his minimum guarantee for the month. The vacation and training credits that lines are constructed with will equal the actual pay you receive for them. When this approach is used it can be very, very good for the pilot group. It is a cost management tool that reduces the cost of being over staffed to a minimum.

You need to look at the language and see which approach it is taking. Open time issues such as trip swap systems become almost irrelevant. There should be a minimum of open time, if any, at the end of line construction. Any language that forces the company to leave time in open time should be considered very carefully. With PBS systems in place management will learn to run a bare bones reserve system - they won't be working much - and any big increase in open time tends to result in mandatory over time.

Linking PBS to issues other than line construction has generally, but not all the time, resulted in poor PBS language for the pilots. You make concessions you shouldn't. PBS should be considered on its own. The LOA process you are evidiently using, outside of Section 6 negotiations, gives you a lot of leverage for this. Fix your other problems in Section 6 negotiations.

Most pilot groups, once they get it right, love PBS. NW, America West, Hawaiian and PCL are good examples. Get it wrong - CAL, United and you will hate it. The system involved doesn't seem to make a difference. Some of the users of the NavTec system love it, some hate it. The same for the Kronos system. The key is knowing what to negotiate.

Good luck.